Monthly Digest Of IBC Cases: May 2024
Sachika Vij
5 Jun 2024 6:57 AM GMT
SUPREME COURT Can Homebuyer's Claim For Apartment Be Rejected For Not Filing Claim During Insolvency Process Against Builder? Supreme Court To Decide Case Title: Ayush Agarwal vs Jaypee Infratech Ltd. & Ors. Citation: Civil Appeal No. 5185/2024 The Supreme Court of India is set to determine whether the non-filing of a claim during the insolvency resolution process of...
SUPREME COURT
Case Title: Ayush Agarwal vs Jaypee Infratech Ltd. & Ors.
Citation: Civil Appeal No. 5185/2024
The Supreme Court of India is set to determine whether the non-filing of a claim during the insolvency resolution process of a builder can result in the rejection of a homebuyer's claim for allotment of apartment.
The case surrounds the insolvency process of Jaypee Infratech Limited. Its resolution plan was approved by the National Company Law Tribunal and was subsequently challenged in the Appellate Tribunal. In the main appeal, several intervention applications were filed including the one filed by the present appellant, an allottee of unit in Kosmos. The same was supposed to be developed by Jaypee.
The Division Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, while issuing notice in the instant appeal, also added:
“We clarify that the issue of notice in the present appeal will not come in the way of execution/implementation of the resolution plan. Allotment of the unit to the appellant, if made, will be subject to the outcome of the present appeal and the right and claim of the appellant.”
Case Title: Manan Chopra and Ors vs Soni Realtors Pvt Ltd.
Citation: Civil Appeal No. 5452/2024
The Supreme Court of India (on May 06) issued notice to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, inter-alia, on the requirement to obtain a certified copy of the order and attach the same with the appeal.
The Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta has issued notice considering that there is “considerable ambiguity” in certain issues concerning the service of the orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, uploading of orders on the website, and the one mentioned above.
"We are also inclined to issue notice to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, as there appears to be considerable ambiguity concerning service of the orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, uploading of orders on the website and also the requirement to obtain a certified copy of the order and enclose the same with the appeal."
In view of this, the Insolvency Board has been asked to examine whether the process requires any clarification, modification, or simplification.
HIGH COURTS
Case Title: Purushottam Prabhakar Chavan Versus Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (GST)
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 3477 Of 2024
The Bombay High Court has held that lender bank registration with the Central Registry of Securitisation and Security Interest of India (CERSAI) has first priority over Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (GST) (DCST) against proceeds of enforcement under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).
The bench of Justice B.P. Colabawalla and Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan observed that the Lender Bank had first priority in enforcement against the Walkeshwar Flat with effect from January 24, 2020, having been the first to register with CERSAI, which was done on January 2, 2020. The bench noted that Encore ARC, which conducted the auction on February 28, 2023, acquired the entitlement to priority from the lender bank along with the assignment of the loans to the borrowers with attendant security interests on March 21, 2020.
Case Title: M/s Kerala Chamber Of Commerce And Industry vs. Directorate of Enforcement
Case Number: CRL.MC No. 3605 of 2024
The Kerala High Court stated that prima facie, a Resolution Professional appointed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy ('IB') Code for carrying the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP') of the Company cannot be hauled up in a criminal proceeding initiated against the Company.
Winding Up Proceedings On Nascent Stage, To Be Transferred To NCLT: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Arabian Oilfield Suppliers & Services vs Greka Drilling (India) Limited
Case No.: CO.PET. 88/2016 & CO.APPL. 381/2016, CO.APPL. 382/2016, CO.APPL. 1514/2018
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma held that winding up proceedings pending before High Courts, which are at a nascent stage and have not progressed to an advanced stage, ought to be transferred to the NCLT.
Case Title: Shantanu Prakash vs State Bank Of India & Ors
Case No.: W.P.(C) 1730/2024, CM APPL. 7177/2024 & CM APPL. 11269/2024
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held that the concerned party must be provided with all requisite documents that form the basis of Show Cause Notices ('SCNs') by the banks. It held that this enables the party to submit a proper reply and address all allegations effectively. Without access to these underlying documents, the procedure of issuing an SCN and filing a response would be rendered meaningless.
NCLAT
Case Title: Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority vs. Monitoring Committee of Jaypee Infratech Ltd. Through Anuj Jain, Secretary & Ors.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.493 of 2023 & I.A. No. 3017, 3703 of 2023 & 2535, 2548, 2660, 2669 of 2024
The National Company Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT) Delhi bench, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Technical Member) held that Suraksha Realty must pay ₹1,334.31 crore to YEIDA over the next four years. This payment is intended to enable YEIDA to increase land compensation for farmers. This is the obligation which stems from a concession agreement between Jaypee and YEIDA.
NCLAT Delhi: Ex-Director Is Ineligible To Submit Resolution Plan For MSME CD Being Wilful Defaulter
Case Title: Namdev Hindurao Patil vs. Virendra Kumar Jain, Liquidator, Warana Dairy and Agro Industries Ltd. and Ors.
Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 858 of 2023 & I.A. No. 2925 of 2024
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) held that an ex-director is ineligible to submit a resolution plan for the resolution of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises ('MSME') Corporate Debtor based on his declaration as a wilful defaulter at the date of submitting the Resolution Plan.
Case Title: Pooja Mehra vs. Nilesh Sharma and Ors.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1511 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that the belated claims by creditors cannot be considered given the time-bound nature of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC') proceedings.
Case Title: Sarda Energy and Minerals Limited vs. Ashish Arjunkumar Rathi & Ors.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1395 – 1397 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) sets aside an order on violation of natural justice holding that the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT Mumbai) has no right to substitute its own assumption over the commercial wisdom of Committee of Creditors (CoC).
NCLAT Seeks Google's Response On Appeals Against Play Store Billing Policy
Case Title: People Interactive India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Competition Commission of India & Ors.
Case No.: Competition App. (AT) No. 7 of 2024
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi bench of Justice Yogesh Khanna (Judicial Member) and Ajai Das Mehrotra (Technical Member) admitted appeals filed by several prominent entities, including Kuku FM, Shaadi.com, Indian Broadcasting and Digital Foundation (IBDF), and People Interactive India Pvt. Ltd. This move follows their dissatisfaction with the Competition Commission of India's (CCI) decision to deny interim relief from complying with Google's contentious billing policies.
Case Title: Mukund Rajhans (Suspended Director of Topaki Media Private Limited) vs. Rajasthan Patrika Private Limited & Anr.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1398 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that the Corporate Debtor cannot escape liability by contending that it is merely an agent and by taking recourse under Section 230 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Case Title: Mukund Rajhans (Suspended Director of Topaki Media Private Limited) vs. Rajasthan Patrika Private Limited & Anr.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1398 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that documentary evidence including postal receipt mentioning the registered address of the Corporate Debtor confirms the issuance of a Demand Notice under Section 8 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
Case Title: Premjayanti Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. Shivam Water Treaters Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 124 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) evokes the Doctrine of 'Approbrate and Reprobrate' imposing a cost of Rs. 1 Lakh with allowing appropriate proceedings under the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act.
Case Title: Milind Kashiram Jadhav vs State Bank of India
Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1589 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that part payments between the Non-Performing Asset (“NPA”) classification and loan recall notice cannot mean that loan recall notice shall constitute the relevant date of default under the IBC. Further, partial payments on the part of the Corporate Debtor cannot absolve it from default status.
Case Title: Namdev Hindurao Patil vs. Virendra Kumar Jain, Liquidator, Warana Dairy and Agro Industries Ltd. and Ors.
Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 858 of 2023 & I.A. No. 2925 of 2024
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) held that the relevant date to determine the ineligibility to submit a Resolution Plan is on the date on which the Resolution Plan was first submitted by the Resolution Applicant.
Case Title: R.B. Singh and Anr. vs. Rashmi Cement Ltd. and Anr.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1187 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that if no Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) refund/ Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) claim has been included in the Demand Notice under Section 8 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) or in Form 5 by the Operational Creditor, the same cannot become a ground of default on which Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) under IBC can be initiated.
Case Title: Partha Sarathy Sarkar vs Union of India & Ors.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.576 of 2024
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, comprising Shri Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Shri Barun Mitra and Shri Arun Baroka (Technical Members), in Partha Sarathy Sarkar vs Union of India & Ors. has held that the decision taken by New Resolution Professional cannot be objected by the Erstwhile Resolution Professional after replacement who is now proceeding with the CIRP.
Case Title: Ashok Dattatray Atre and Ors. vs. State Bank of India and Ors.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 221 and 222 of 2024
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that the Adjudicating Authority can extend payment timelines under the Resolution Plan without the express concurrence of the Committee of Creditors ('CoC').
When Claims And Counter Claims Are Involved, Liquidator Cannot Decide The Same: NCLAT Chennai
Case Title: M/s. FLSmidth Private Limited vs Lanco Infratech Ltd
Case No.: TA (AT) No.207/2021 (CA (AT) (Ins) No.1353/2019)
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Chennai Bench, comprising Shri Justice Venugopal M. (Judicial Member) and Shri Jatindranath Swain (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 61 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) in M/s. FLSmidth Private Limited vs Lanco Infratech Ltd. has held that when claim and counter-claims are involved Liquidator cannot decide the same.
Case Title: Sanam Fashion & Design Exchange Ltd. vs. Ktex Nonwovens Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1234 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) held that the dispute between the parties regarding contractual conditions relating to place of delivery and obligation of parties for transport of goods is a “pre-existing dispute” under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”).
NCLAT Delhi: Extension Of Time In Payment Is Not Modification Of Resolution Plan
Case Title: Ashok Dattatray Atre and Ors. vs. State Bank of India and Ors.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 221 and 222 of 2024
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that an extension of time in payment is not a modification of the Resolution Plan.
Case Title: Ashok Tiwari vs. DBS Bank India (Ltd.) and Anr.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 195 of 2024
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that Rule 49 of NCLT Rules, 2016 gives ample jurisdiction to the Adjudicating Authority to proceed for ex parte as the corporate debtor does not appear. “Appearance” as contemplated under Rule 49(1) is an appearance by the corporate debtor or by an authorized representative.
File No. 10/36/2018-NCLAT
The Registrar of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) has issued a notice dated 27.05.2024, intimating that NCLAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi, the Registry shall function during the period of Annual Summer Vacation from 03.06.2024 to 30.06.2024.
Case Title: Mr. Devarajan Raman Liquidator of Kotak Urja Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner Income Tax and Ors.
Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 977 of 2023
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that the set-off/adjustment of demand with refund by Income Tax Department during the intervening period when the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP') timeline period has expired but before passing of Liquidation Order under Section 33 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC') amounts to violation of moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC.
NCLT
Case Title: Machino Transport Private Limited vs. Machino Finance Private Limited
Case No.: IA (CA) No. 213/KB/2023 and CP No. 42/KB/2021
The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Kolkata, comprising Shri Rohit Kapoor (Judicial Member) and Shri Balraj Joshi (Technical Member) held that the limitation period for enforcing a scheme under the Companies Act, 2013 is 12 years as prescribed under the Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Case Title: Mr. Jai Kumar Rai and Mrs. Supriya Saxena v. Mr. Arun Kapoor In M/s. Capri Global Capital Ltd. v. M/s. Monarch Brookefields LLP
Case No.: IA No. 3014 of 2021 In CP (IB) 2517(MB) of 2018
The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Mumbai Bench, comprising Mr. Kuldip Kumar Kareer (Judicial Member) and Mr. Anil Raj Chellan (Technical Member) has held that claims cannot be admitted after the approval of the resolution plan by the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) even if approval by the Adjudicating Authority under section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) is pending.
Amount Given As Share Application Money Does Not Qualify As A Financial Debt Under IBC: NCLT Kolkata
Case Title: Mittson Fille Enterprise vs. Sammaan Ventures Limited
Case No.: C.P. (IB) No. 147/KB/2023
The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Kolkata Bench, comprising Shri Rohit Kapoor (Judicial Member) and Shri Balraj Joshi (Technical Member) has held that amount given as Share Application Money does not qualify as a financial debt under section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”).
Case Title: Subodh Kumar Agarwal, RP of Hindustan Controls and Equipment Pvt. Ltd. vs. Steel Authority of India
Case No.: IA(IB) No. 1820/( KB) /2023 in CP (IB) No. 1256/KB/2019
The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Kolkata, comprising Smt. Bidisha Banerjee (Judicial Member) and Shri D. Arvind (Technical Member) held that the Adjudicating Authority lacks jurisdiction to set aside an arbitral award even when the award was issued post-initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP') and during moratorium period under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC').
Case Title: Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited v. Primcomm Media Distribution Ventures Private Limited
Case No.: C.P.(IB)-246(MB)/C-III/2022
The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Mumbai Bench, comprising Smt. Lakshmi Gurung (Judicial Member) and Shri Charanjeet Singh Gulati (Technical Member) has held that loan sanction letter, statement of account, copy of notice under section 13(2) Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI”), and revised payment schedule will constitute “such other record” under section 7(3)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (“Code”).
Case Title: Punjab National Bank vs. Arshiya Limited
Case No.: CP (IB) No. 3143/MB/2019
The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Mumbai Bench, comprising Shri K.R. Saji Kumar (Judicial Member) and Shri Sanjiv Dutt (Technical Member) has held that a General Power of Attorney (“GPA”) holder can file an application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) without having a specific Board Resolution.
NCLT Notifies Holidays And Upcoming Vacation In Benches Of NCLT
File No.: 10/03/2024-NCLT
The Registrar of the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) has issued a circular dated 02.05.2024, intimating the holidays and upcoming vacation benches at NCLT. The Registrar has directed that during the vacation only urgent matters at NCLT Benches shall be taken up via video conferencing mode. The same is subject to the availability of the Hon'ble Member (s). Hon'ble Member(s) shall grant hearing to the urgent matters as per their convenience.
File No. 25/02/2024-NCLT
The Registrar of the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) has issued a circular dated 29.04.2024, intimating a free Wi-Fi facility for Advocates, litigants, and other stakeholders of NCLT Benches. The said circular has been issued in compliance with the Hon'ble Supreme Court's Order in Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s). 351/2023, titled “Sarvesh Mathur vs. The Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana”.
Case Title: Mr. Sanjay Gupta Liquidator of Lanco Babandh Power Limited vs. Mr. Tarun Kumar Panda & Ors.
Case No.: Contempt Petition No.16 of 2023 in IA No.939 of 2020 in CP (IB) No.296/7/HDB/2018
The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Hyderabad, comprising Justice Rajeev Bhardwaj (Judicial Member) and Mr. Sanjay Puri (Technical Member) held Mr. Ravi Kiran Saladi Konda, Deputy Traffic Manager, New Mangalore Port Authority and Mr. Sriman Nayan Mishra, Senior Assistant Traffic Manager, Paradip Port Authority ('Respondents') guilty of contempt for disobeying the directions of the Adjudicating Authority and sentenced them to simple imprisonment of 1 month each with a fine of Rs 1000.
NCLT Defers Hearing On Go First's Insolvency Case To July
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi division bench of Justice Mahendra Khandelwal (Judicial Member) and Dr. Sanjeev Ranjan (Technical Member) has postponed the hearing on the insolvency plea of Go First, the grounded airline, to July 11, 2024. This decision came among concerns regarding the future of the airline. The tribunal stated it needed time for further examination of the recent developments, particularly the ramifications of the Delhi High Court's order, before reaching a verdict.
NCLT Grants Approval For Viacom18 And Star India Merger Scheme
Case Title: In the matter of The Scheme of Arrangement Among Viacom18 Media Private Limited (“Transferor Company”) And Digital18 Media Limited (“Transferee Company or Demerged Company”) And Star India Private Limited (“Resulting Company”)
Case No.: CA (CAA)/64/MB-IV/2024
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in Mumbai has taken the first step towards the completion of merger deal involving Reliance Industries Ltd's Viacom18, its subsidiary Digital18, and Walt Disney's Star India. The tribunal's Mumbai bench has admitted the merger scheme.
Case Title: Mr. Narayanam Nageswara Rao vs. Mr. K. Sivalingam (RP) and Anr.
Case No.: IA. Nos. 897 & 898 of 2024 in CP (IB) No. 299/7/HDB/2018
The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Hyderabad, comprising Dr. Venkata Ramakrishna Badarinath Nandula (Judicial Member) and Shri Charan Singh (Technical Member) held that the term “connected person” referred to in Explanation-I read with Section 29A(j) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC') relates to the Resolution Applicant and not the Corporate Debtor.
NCLT Mumbai Approves Withdrawal Of Insolvency Proceedings Against Syska LED Lights After Settlement
Case Title: Ms. Neeraj Singh Proprietor of M/S. N.J. Electronics Vs Syska Led Lights Private Limited
Case Number: IA 2297/2024 in C.P. (IB)/63(MB)2024
The Mumbai bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) of Justice Virendra Singh Bisht (Judicial Member) and Prabhat Kumar (Technical Member) has approved the withdrawal of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated against Syska LED Lights Pvt Ltd. This decision was made after a settlement agreement was reached between Syska and its operational creditor, Neeraj Singh, proprietor of NJ Electronics.
Case Title: Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. vs ND S Art World Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: IA 2243/2024 (New IA) in C.P. (IB)/895(MB)2022
The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Mumbai, comprising Justice Virendra Singh Bisht (Retd.) (Judicial Member) and Mr. Prabhat Kumar (Technical Member) allowed the plea of ND Studio Resolution Professional's (“RP”) granting exclusion of 116 days from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) period acknowledging the genuine hardships due to the ongoing criminal proceedings.
NCLT Issues Three Notices To Byju's Over Unpaid Dues, Hearing Scheduled For July 3
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has issued notices to Think and Learn Pvt Ltd, the parent company of Byju's, due to claims of unpaid dues from several creditors.
Three companies, McGraw Hill, Cogent E-services, and AG Automation, have filed cases against Byju's. McGraw Hill claims that Byju's owes them Rs 1.43 crore, while Cogent E-services says they are owed Rs 6 crore. The NCLT has set hearings for these cases on July 3, giving Byju's two weeks to respond and another week for the creditors to reply.
Record Approval Of Resolution Plans Under IBC in FY2024 By NCLT
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) achieved a record number of approvals for resolution plans under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) in the financial year 2023-24 (FY24). According to an analysis by ICRA, the NCLT approved 269 resolution plans, a significant increase from the previous high of 189 plans in FY23. This notable rise in approvals is attributed to the surge in corporate debtors admitted under the IBC in FY23, largely influenced by the economic impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Case Title: Metamorphosis Trading LLP vs. Membrane Filters (India) Private Limited
Case No.: C.P.(IB)-880(MB)/C-III/2022
The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Mumbai Bench, comprising Ms. Lakshmi Gurung (Judicial Member) and Sh. Charanjeet Singh Gulati (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) in the case of Metamorphosis Trading LLP vs Membrane Filters (India) Private Limited has held that the loan amount acknowledged in the books of the Corporate Debtor as “Long-term Borrowings” is a loan having commercial effect of borrowing and is therefore, covered under section 5(8) of the I&B Code as financial debt.
Case Title: SHAARC Projects Limited vs. Hindustan Construction Company Limited
Case No.: C.P. (I.B) No. 1077/MB/2021
The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Mumbai Bench, comprising Justice Reeta Kohli (Judicial Member) and Madhu Sinha (Technical Member) has held that an Operational Creditor cannot combine interest under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (“MSMED”) to the principal amount to meet the threshold limit under section 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) if it has obtained the MSME certificate post appointed date under section 16 read with section 2(b) of MSMED.
Undated Certificate Of Bankers Book Evidence Act Valid Under IBC: NCLT Chandigarh
Case Title: Canara Bank vs. Laggar Industries Limited
Case No.: CP (IB) 29/CHD/PB/2022
The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Chandigarh Bench, comprising Mr. Harnam Singh Thakur (Judicial Member) and Mr. L.N. Gupta (Technical Member) has held that an undated certificate of Bankers Book Evidence Act, 1891, (“Act”) constitutes a valid certificate for regulation 2A of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (“IBBI Regulations”).
Assignee Of A Financial Creditor Also A Financial Creditor U/S 5 (7) Of IBC: NCLT Kolkata
Case Title: Assets Care & Reconstruction Enterprise Limited vs Ankit Metal & Power Limited
Case No.: C.P (IB) No.91/KB/2023
The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Kolkata Bench, comprising Shri Rohit Kapoor (Judicial Member) and Shri Balraj Joshi (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) in Assets Care & Reconstruction Enterprise Limited vs Ankit Metal & Power Limited has held that the assignee of a Financial Creditor is also a Financial Creditor within the scope of Section 5(7) of IBC, 2016 and is thus competent to file the case under Section 7 of IBC.
Detention Charges Come Within The Purview Of Operational Debt: NCLT Mumbai
Case Title: ABC India Ltd. vs Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: C.P. No. 4216/MB/2019
The National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, comprising Ms. Reeta Kohli, (Judicial Member) and Madhu Sinha (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) in ABC India Ltd. vs Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd. has held that Detention Charges are very much a part of the Transportation Charges and hence a part of Operational Debt.
Case Title: S.A. Consultants & Forwarders Pvt. Ltd. v. Prime Cargo Movers & Logistics Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: C.P. (IB) 1049/MB/2020
